[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [wsbpel] Issue 103 - Good Idea!
Hi all, [After a morning of meeting, back online ... :-) ] Yes, I agree with Ron. We may not want to overload expression, like $var/a/b/c, as the assignment target. I tend to believe that we still want to: (1) keep both expression and query in from-spec (2) keep query in to-spec (3) allow the usage of $var in expression Danny ... if we pass issue 11 (assume we go for insertBefore and appendChild), the to-spec for insertBefore and appendChild will be the same. The only change is: expression in from-spec now can use $var E.g.: <appendChild> <from expression="$fooVar/abc/def" /> <to variable="barVar" query="/ghi/jkl" /> </appendChild> the expression would be appended as as the last child under "/ghi/jkl". And, "/ghi/jkl" are existing nodes. IMHO, XPath location path used in query or expression will always point to existing nodes, even after / if Issue 11 is passed. Thanks! Regards, Alex yiu Ron Ten-Hove wrote: > Danny van der Rijn wrote: > >> maybe i just don't know XPATH well enough, but if $var/a/b/c doesn't >> exist, >> can it be the target of an assign? >> >> >> > XPath 1.0 expressions turn into node-sets, booleans, numbers, or > strings (and do so without side effects). They don't turn into > positional references. $var/a/b/c doesn't make sense as the target of > an <assign> activity, from the XPath point of view. > > -Ron > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster > of the OASIS TC), go to > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.php. > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]